Closed bertfrees closed 5 years ago
I tried running the test book from the nordic migrator through (C00000.epub), and the result is not valid when I use the Pipeline 1 DAISY 2.02 DTB Validator. I get similar results for our other books. I'm attaching the XML report from Pipeline 1: report.xml.txt
(Also, the "validation" option should probably be a boolean rather than a string option, but that's not really related to this PR.)
Thanks for testing. How have you tested it? In your report I'm seeing all the errors that this PR should have fixed.
Why a boolean? It is currently a "choice":
<choice>
<value>off</value>
<a:documentation xml:lang="en">No validation</a:documentation>
<value>report</value>
<a:documentation xml:lang="en">Report validation issues</a:documentation>
<value>abort</value>
<a:documentation xml:lang="en">Abort on validation issues</a:documentation>
</choice>
Oh, maybe I tested it the wrong way then.
git subrepo pull modules/scripts --branch super/epub3-to-daisy202
…/bin/pipeline2
make run
to start the engine.boolean/choice: oh, ok. It was a text input field with "off" as the default so I assumed it it would be "on" or "off". Maybe it has an incorrect option type.
OK let me push a branch on which you can test it...
Regarding the "validation" option: I'm also seeing this in the web UI now. It looks like the data type is not exposed. Will investigate.
@josteinaj Check the epub3-to-daisy202 branch in the super project.
I tried the new branch. Still getting errors, but some different errors: report-20190222.xml.txt
Thanks. I think the validator from Pipeline 1 is more strict than the one in Pipeline 2. I wonder why. These are the validation issues:
File not found: C00000-2-toc.html (in file:/C:/Users/jostein/Desktop/C00000/C00000-01-cover.html)
This one is solved. It was an error in the input EPUB. @rdeltour epubcheck didn't pick this up. See https://github.com/w3c/epubcheck/issues/975
@rdeltour Do you think we should make the validator more strict?
Merged in https://github.com/daisy/pipeline-modules/commit/98f901d7aa5ad6cd671cda4797513d6ac4e1cfa9 and addressed most of @rdeltour's comments.
Yes, this will be the subject of a next PR. This one addresses #86 and #92.
Addresses the issues https://github.com/daisy/pipeline-scripts/issues/86 and https://github.com/daisy/pipeline-scripts/issues/92.